Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 132 / Monday, July 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 39633 

1. On page 32275, in the third 

column, in the DATES section, remove 

‘‘May 21, 2010’’ and add in its place 

‘‘May 24, 2010’’. 

Dated: June 30, 2010. 

Kathryn Sinniger, 

Acting Chief of the Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law (CG–943), U.S. Coast 

Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2010–16375 Filed 7–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0473; FRL–9174–5] 

Extension of Deadline for Action on 

Section 126 Petition From New Jersey 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is extending by 6 

months the deadline for EPA to take 

action on a petition submitted by the 

New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection (NJDEP). The 

petition requests that EPA make a 

finding under the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

that the coal-fired Portland Generating 

Station in Upper Mount Bethel 

Township, Northampton County, 

Pennsylvania, is emitting air pollutants 

in violation of the provisions of the 

CAA. Under the CAA, EPA is 

authorized to grant a time extension for 

responding to the petition if EPA 

determines that the extension is 

necessary, among other things, to meet 

the purposes of the CAA’s rulemaking 

requirements. By this action, EPA is 

making that determination. 

DATES: The effective date of this action 

is July 12, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this rulemaking under Docket 

ID number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0473. 

All documents in the docket are listed 

in the http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center EPA/DC, EPA 

West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the EPA Docket Center is 

(202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

General questions concerning this final 

rule should be addressed to Ms. Gobeail 

McKinley, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Geographic 

Strategies Group, Mail Code C539–04, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 

telephone (919) 541–5246; e-mail 

address: mckinley.gobeail@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Final Action 

A. Rule 

B. Notice-and-Comment Under the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

C. Effective Date Under the APA 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Judicial Review 

I. Background 

This is a procedural action to extend 

the deadline for EPA to respond to a 

petition from New Jersey filed under 

CAA section 126. EPA received the 

section 126 petition on May 13, 2010. 

The petition requests that EPA make a 

finding that the coal-fired Portland 

Generating Station (Portland Plant) in 

Upper Mount Bethel Township, 

Northampton County, Pennsylvania, is 

emitting air pollutants in violation of 

the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

of the CAA. That section provides that 

each state’s State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) shall contain adequate provisions 

prohibiting emissions of any air 

pollutant in amounts which will 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance by, any other state with 

respect to any national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS). The petition 

asserts that emissions from the Portland 

Plant have a significant impact on New 

Jersey’s air quality and that this impact 

would be mitigated by further regulation 

of fine particulate matter and sulfur 

dioxide emissions from this plant. 

Section 126(b) authorizes states or 

political subdivisions to petition EPA to 

find that a major source or group of 

stationary sources in upwind states 

emits or would emit any air pollutant in 

violation of the prohibition of section 

110(a)(2)(D) by contributing 

significantly to nonattainment or 

maintenance problems in downwind 

states. If EPA makes such a finding, EPA 

is authorized to establish federal 

emissions limits for the sources which 

so contribute. 

Under section 126(b), EPA must make 

the finding requested in the petition, or 

must deny the petition within 60 days 

of its receipt. Under section 126(c), any 

existing sources for which EPA makes 

the requested finding must cease 

operations within three months of the 

finding, except that the source may 

continue to operate if it complies with 

emission limitations and compliance 

schedules that EPA may provide to 

bring about compliance with the 

applicable requirements. 

Section 126(b) further provides that 

EPA must allow a public hearing for the 

petition. EPA’s action under section 126 

is also subject to the procedural 

requirements of CAA section 307(d). See 

section 307(d)(1)(N). One of these 

requirements is notice-and-comment 

rulemaking, under section 307(d)(3). 

In addition, section 307(d)(10) 

provides for a time extension, under 

certain circumstances, for rulemaking 

subject to section 307(d). Specifically, 

section 307(d)(10) provides: 

Each statutory deadline for promulgation 

of rules to which this subsection applies 

which requires promulgation less than six 

months after date of proposal may be 

extended to not more than six months after 

date of proposal by the Administrator upon 

a determination that such extension is 

necessary to afford the public, and the 

agency, adequate opportunity to carry out the 

purposes of the subsection. 

Section 307(d)(10) applies to section 

126 rulemakings because the 60-day 

time limit under section 126(b) 

necessarily limits the period after 

proposal to less than six months. 

II. Final Action 

A. Rule 

In accordance with section 307(d)(10), 

EPA is determining that the 60-day 

period afforded by section 126(b) for 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
39634 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 132 / Monday, July 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

responding to the petition from the 

NJDEP is not adequate to allow the 

public and the Agency the opportunity 

to carry out the purposes of section 

307(b). Specifically, the 60-day period is 

insufficient for EPA to complete the 

necessary technical review, develop an 

adequate proposal and allow time for 

notice and comment on whether the 

Portland Plant identified in the section 

126 petition contributes significantly to 

nonattainment or maintenance problems 

in New Jersey. EPA has reviewed the 

petition and supporting technical 

information provided by NJDEP, and 

has scheduled a meeting with NJDEP 

officials to further understand the 

technical information. Additional time 

is required to afford EPA adequate time 

to further review and evaluate the basis 

for the petition, prepare a proposal that 

clearly elucidates the issues to facilitate 

public comment, and provide adequate 

time for the public to comment prior to 

issuing the final rule. As a result of this 

extension, the deadline for EPA to act 

on the petition is January 12, 2011. 

B. Notice-and-Comment Under the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

This document is a final agency 

action, but may not be subject to the 

notice-and-comment requirements of 

the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b). The EPA 

believes that, because of the limited 

time provided to make a determination 

that the deadline for action on the 

section 126 petition should be extended, 

Congress may not have intended such a 

determination to be subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking. However, to 

the extent that this determination 

otherwise would require notice and 

opportunity for public comment, there 

is good cause within the meaning of 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) not to apply those 

requirements here. Providing for notice 

and comment would be impracticable 

because of the limited time provided for 

making this determination, and would 

be contrary to the public interest 

because it would divert Agency 

resources from the substantive review of 

the section 126 petition. 

C. Effective Date Under the APA 

This action is effective on July 12, 

2010. Under the APA, 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3), agency rulemaking may take 

effect before 30 days after the date of 

publication in the Federal Register if 

the agency has good cause to mandate 

an earlier effective date. This action—a 

deadline extension—must take effect 

immediately because its purpose is to 

extend by 6 months the deadline for 

action on the petition. It is important for 

this deadline extension action to be 

effective before the original 60-day 

period for action elapses. As discussed 

above, EPA intends to use the 6-month 

extension period to develop a proposal 

on the petition and provide time for 

public comment before issuing the final 

rule. It would not be possible for EPA 

to complete the required notice-andcomment and public hearing process 

within the original 60-day period noted 

in the statute. These reasons support an 

immediate effective date. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under the 

Executive Order. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320(b). This action 

simply extends the date for EPA to take 

action on a petition and does not 

impose any new obligations or 

enforceable duties on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

Therefore, it does not impose an 

information collection burden. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This final rule is not subject to the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), which 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis for any 

rule that will have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The RFA 

applies only to rules subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking requirements 

under the APA or any other statute. This 

rule is not subject to notice-andcomment requirements under the APA 

or any other statute because, although 

the rule is subject to the APA, the 

Agency has invoked the ‘‘good cause’’ 

exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). 

Therefore, it is not subject to the noticeand-comment requirement. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (URMA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for state, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. This 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any state, local, or tribal governments or 

the private sector. 

This action simply extends the 

deadline for EPA to take action on a 

petition and does not impose any new 

obligations or enforceable duties on any 

state, local or tribal governments or the 

private sector. Therefore, this action is 

not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. This 

action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of URMA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

action simply extends the date for EPA 

to take action on a petition and does not 

impose any new obligations or 

enforceable duties on any small 

governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by state 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the states, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the states, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This rule simply 

extends the date for EPA to take action 

on a petition and does not impose any 

new obligations or enforceable duties on 

any state, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). It will not have substantial direct 

effects on tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the federal 

government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the federal 

government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

This action does not significantly or 

uniquely affect the communities of 

Indian tribal governments. As discussed 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 132 / Monday, July 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 39635 

above, this action imposes no new 

requirements that would impose 

compliance burdens. Accordingly, the 

requirements of Executive Order 13175 

do not apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997) because the Agency does not 

believe the environmental health risks 

or safety risks addressed by this action 

present a disproportionate risk to 

children. This action is not subject to 

executive Order 13045 because it does 

not establish an environmental standard 

intended to mitigate health or safety 

risks. This rule simply extends the 

deadline for EPA to take action on a 

petition and does not impose any 

regulatory requirements. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), 

because it is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Further, 

we have concluded that this rule is not 

likely to have any adverse effects 

because this action simply extends the 

deadline for EPA to take action on a 

petition. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA did not 

consider the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of its programs, 

policies, and activities on minorities 

and low-income populations in the 

United States. 

The EPA has determined that this 

final rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it simply extends the deadline 

for EPA to take action on a petition and 

does not impose any regulatory 

requirements. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 

5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. Section 808 of the 

CRA provides an exception to this 

requirement. For any rule for which an 

agency for good cause finds that notice 

and comment are impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest, the rule may take effect on the 

date set by the Agency. The EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

L. Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by September 10, 

2010. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Electric utilities, 

Intergovernmental relations, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide. 

Dated: July 2, 2010. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–16890 Filed 7–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0730; FRL–9172–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Wisconsin; Redesignation 

of the Manitowoc County and Door 

County Areas to Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving Wisconsin’s 

requests to redesignate the Manitowoc 

County and Door County, Wisconsin 

nonattainment areas to attainment for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard because 

the requests meet the statutory 

requirements for redesignation under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources 

(WDNR) submitted these requests on 

September 11, 2009. 

These approvals involve several 

related actions. EPA is making 

determinations under the CAA that the 

Manitowoc County and Door County 

areas have attained the 1997 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS). These 

determinations are based on three years 

of complete, quality-assured and 

certified ambient air quality monitoring 

data for the 2006–2008 ozone seasons 

that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS has been attained in the areas. 

Complete, quality-assured air quality 

data for the 2009 ozone season have 

been recorded in the EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) and show that the areas 

continue to attain the 8-hour ozone 

standard. EPA is also approving, as 

revisions to the Wisconsin State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), the State’s 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES